Peoria City Council Quiet About Decision to Extend Photo Contract


shhhh

shhh


The Peoria City Council apparently does not want the public to know about its recent decision to extend the red light photo enforcement contract with Redflex. The pilot program began in 2008 and is up for renewal every year. In August the Arizona Republic reported that accidents more than doubled at intersections where cameras are installed. While most organizations would probably cancel a pilot program the decisively showed results the exact opposite of what was desired, the Peoria City Council didn’t let the program results get in the way of their quest for revenue as they voted to extend the “pilot” program for another year.

The Peoria City Council usually is not shy about reporting its decisions and accomplishments to its citizens, except apparently when it comes to the deadly red light camera program. In the latest quarterly newsletter, the Peoria Focus Issue 4 (2009) sent to all residents, the section titled “City Council Highlights” fails to mention this decision to extend the contract. There’s over an inch and a half of extra (blank) column space to print this news, so space or higher-priority content is not the issue. The column does mention such minor announcements as decisions to accept and authorize grants, contracts, or spending in the amount of $3,000, $30,000 and $36,000 and more, so contract size or impact definitely isn’t an issue. Surely the decision to extend a contract to Redflex would be included… but only if they wanted the citizens to be more aware of their decision to keep the cash coming in at the expense of the health and safety of their constituents. It seems that the council is very well aware of the public sentiment regarding photo enforcement and their hoping to just let this issue slip under the radar.

About these ads

27 Responses to Peoria City Council Quiet About Decision to Extend Photo Contract

  1. RPr says:

    Peoria AZ is the only city in AZ to have already voted on the scameras

    2-1 voted them out

    • mghtyms04 says:

      Unfortunately, when this vote took place back in 1991, it was only to terminate and to not renew the cities contract for speed cameras.

      • mghtyms04 says:

        CHAPTER 2 – ADMINISTRATION
        Sec. 2-71. Photo/Traffic speed monitoring devices; termination of contracts.
        (a) Upon action by the mayor and council or in accordance with the terms of this
        chapter the city manager shall be authorized to enter into negotiations for and to take actions
        necessary and required to terminate all contracts involving the purchase of and or use by the
        city of photo/traffic speed monitoring devices consisting of camera(s) and a traffic radar (or
        other device) capable of measuring the speed of motor vehicles and which records such speed
        on a photograph of such vehicle and its operator.
        (b) Upon a determination by the city manager that the continuation of a contract
        involving the purchase of or use of photo/traffic speed monitoring devices is no longer in the
        best interest of the city, the city manager shall be authorized to issue all notices required under
        the terms and provisions of the contract to terminate the agreement and to take any and all acts
        necessary and required to effectuate the termination under the terms of any contract between
        the city and any other party for the purchase of or use of photo/traffic speed monitoring
        devices.
        (c) The city manager shall consult with the city attorney on the termination of any
        contracts pursuant to the provisions of this section.
        (Code 1977, § 3-1-9)
        (Ord. No. 91-46, 11/12/91, Renumbered)
        (Ord. No. 92-04, 2/11/92, Enacted)
        (Ord. No. 94-19, 4/19/94, Amended)
        (Res. No. 90-61A, 1/2/91, Approved by Voters 3/19/91)

        CHAPTER 2 – ADMINISTRATION
        Sec. 2-73. Photo/Traffic speed monitoring device; expenditures.
        (a) Notwithstanding any other provisions of the Peoria City Code, in exercising the
        powers under Sections 2-71 through 2-73, the city manager may terminate any contract
        involving the purchase of or use of photo/traffic speed monitoring devices on such terms as he
        believes is in the best interest of the city.
        (b) Notwithstanding any other provisions of the Peoria City Code, in exercising the
        powers under Sections 2-71 through 2-73, the city manager may incur charges, fees, penalties,
        costs, reimbursements as provided by the terms of the contract required to terminate the
        agreement, provided that the total amount of such charges, fees, penalties, costs,
        reimbursements do not exceed the sum of fifty thousand ($50,000.00) Dollars.
        (c) The city manager shall notify the mayor and council of the costs necessary and
        required for the termination of any contract for purchase of or use of photo/traffic speed
        monitoring devices. The city manager shall submit all such costs to the mayor and council for
        their review and approval.
        (Code 1977, § 3-1-11)
        (Res. No. 90-61A, 1/2/91, Approved by Voters 3/19/91)

  2. Alucard says:

    How can this council extend such a contract when the city has already voted to get rid of cameras by a margin of 2:1? The councillors must have visions of spinning dollar signs….

  3. B says:

    The bureaucrats, like our favorite, Jay Heiler, continue to spin BS behind the scenes… and the puppets, also known as elected officials, tell the public to bend over without lube.

    Nevermind the statistics… more than DOUBLED??

  4. Peoria only voted to make “SPEED” scameras illegal, not red light ones.

  5. Dr Jett says:

    I’m appalled!!! Peoria City Council would rather see the citizens traveling through their city get hurt, maimed or killed than give up the $$$$$$$$$$$. I wonder if they would be willing to answer questions at the city council meeting about their negative views concerning their citizens safety?
    Naw, just business as usual. They only need the citizens when they are trying to pull off a scam. Just because the accident rate more than doubled doesn’t seem sufficient to give up the $$$$$$$$$$.

  6. Doc says:

    Ya’ gotta’ call these people & let ‘em know how UNEMPLOYED they’re gonna’ be come th’ next city counsil election, & th mayor too!

    Office of the Mayor & City Council
    Contact Info:
    8401 W. Monroe St.
    Peoria, AZ 85345
    Phone: 623-773-7306

    Have a sign wave @ th’ address!

  7. photoradarscam says:

    Ron Ames has been very receptive to my emails and information. I think he’s on our side. The rest of them don’t have a clue.

  8. Stacey says:

    I watched part of the city council meeting and noted one of the members talking about data a citizen had gave him, Mr. PRS.

    • photoradarscam says:

      If they won’t do the research on their own, we need to do it for them. The council has NO CLUE about the cities across the country that have removed cameras because they didn’t improve safety and the OTHER cities with data just like Peoria showing accidents more than DOUBLING.

      • Will Kay says:

        Isn’t it their job to do the research?

        • photoradarscam says:

          Yes, it is their job. The problem is that they think that their research duty is met when they ask the camera vendor and police chief lots of questions, rather than getting on the Internet and doing real research.

  9. photoradarscam says:

    We need to keep an eye on Glendale now:
    http://www.glendalestar.com/articles/2009/12/03/news/news01.txt

    They REMOVED the one camera they had. They are waiting to compile data… not sure why it is taking so long. Gotta love this fool’s quote:

    “It makes sense to me that Glendale should continue the concept of reducing crashes by installing intersection cameras, even though the pilot project data may not appear to support the idea of cameras reducing crashes. The use of cameras at high accident intersections does make sense.”

    THIS IS THE KIND OF IDIOCY WE ARE UP AGAINST!

  10. Michael Milstead says:

    I love this part of the story:

    One member of council, Mayor Elaine Scruggs, said she is opposed to the use of camera enforcement for several reasons.

    “In the State of Arizona any type of citation for photo radar or red light camera is not considered legal until it is served in person by a process server, so if we are going to use this camera enforcement, we need to change the state law,” Scruggs said.

    Hiring process servers can be costly to cities, Scruggs said, and servers will make three attempts and only go 35 miles making it unfair to those who live within the city.

    • Will Kay says:

      Change the law? How does she plan to constitutionally accomplish that? How the hell does she think she is able to undo Due Process? What an idiot.

  11. Stiletto says:

    Very interesting.
    I’ve only been living in Arizona since July and this is my second automated issued ticket within a span of [obviously] a short few months. Mind you, I rarely get tickets.

    Having a license is essential to what I do for a living and as you know you need a car to get around Arizona, period.

    I try to drive within the speed limit but the seemingly frequent limit changes are a bit challenging, not to mention the paranoia I feel from all these stupid Redflex cameras is quite unnerving.

    If I get a third ticket I have no choice but to relocate to another state. Arizona will lose my money in the long run while another state gains it.

    Arizona’s economy is already piss poor. Antagonizing potential and current newcomers is not a good strategy.

  12. camerafraud liars club..accepting applications says:

    so sorry they did not tell camerafraud…. you are not the power group you think you are

  13. warondriving says:

    There is a lot of recent traffic on this post for some reason. It was written in December of 2009, at which point Peoria did actually extend the contract despite the horrible safety record in that city.

    Peoria just cancelled their contract with Redflex in September of 2011. They will be coming down this week and next.

    For more info, go to http://warondriving.com/post/11021276789/peoria-paradise-valley-scottsdale-traffic-cameras

  14. Great web site. Plenty of useful information here.
    I’m sending it to several pals ans additionally sharing in delicious.

    And obviously, thank you to your effort!

  15. Ralf says:

    At this moment I am ready to do my breakfast, afterward having my breakfast coming yet again to read more news.

  16. Benjamin says:

    Wow, this piece of writing is fastidious, my sister is analyzing such
    things, therefore I am going to tell her.

  17. Kristal says:

    I’m truly enjoying the design and layout of your website.
    It’s a very easy on the eyes which makes it much more pleasant
    for me to come here and visit more often. Did you hire out a designer to create your theme?
    Exceptional work!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,338 other followers

%d bloggers like this: